An open discsusion on the consequences of death

[PandaTaru]

Actually, this is continually debated by psychologists and professionals in Law enforcement and Correction. It cannot be determined one way or the other which is more effective... there are good cases for both. I'm personally against positive reinforcement as a deterrent to negative action since I am more convinced by that side of the scientific argument.

Yes but that's IRL and I doubt you can relate what happen IRL to a game. For the record, over praising a kid/child IRL can drive him/her to severe psychological pathology the same way as if you had over-scolded that same kid/child.

So how about this? No loss of anything... no durability loss, no SP loss, no Anima loss. We just increase the weakness timer to 10 minutes. Since time is the most valuable asset in MMOs, that should be a viable deterrent.

that's what we already have and it would just be the same but on a longer timer.

In case of you missed what some people wrote in this thread, FFXI death wasn't only scary but it also made people not help each others because they knew/feared they would lose EXP during a BCNM/Mission/<random> quest and stuff.
The last thing a game should teach people is selfishness. Really.

[Kaedan]

Yes but that's IRL and I doubt you can relate what happen IRL to a game. For the record, over praising a kid/child IRL can drive him/her to severe psychological pathology the same way if you had over-scolded that same kid/child.

Exactly. People are people, whether it's a game or RL. Psychology doesn't change.

that's what we already have and it would just be the same but on a longer timer.

Yes, that was my point. I was mostly being facetious, but I would actually be ok with increasing the weakness timer to 10 minutes. That would make it impossible for "chargers" to actually complete content and would cost something very significant to MMOs... Time.

And the sad part is, many of the people screaming against SP would be ok with increasing the weakness timer... but what they don't realize is that it's the same thing in different packaging, which is really sad.

In case of you missed what some people wrote in this thread, FFXI death wasn't only scary but it also made people not help each others because they knew/feared they would lose EXP during a BCNM/Mission/<random> quest and stuff.
The last thing a game should teach people is selfishness. Really.

I didn't "miss" it at all. I've specifically acknowledged it, actually. I have suggested a system that is much less penalizing than FFXI. So what's your point?

[kukurumei]

So how about this? No loss of anything... no durability loss, no SP loss, no Anima loss. We just increase the weakness timer to 10 minutes. Since time is the most valuable asset in MMOs, that should be a viable deterrent.

Not really. "time" is situational. I loose nothing if I'm about to log off, or go have lunch or the millions of other things that time does not matter, in that it's a "free multi-task".

It's not a hard system to implement, it's just really stupid social one. That's why the XP loss system is so freakin easy to advise.

It's a simple mathematical formula to get balanced. If 20% is too harsh, you do 10% if 10% is too light, you do 15% etc, until it's acceptable.

Where the alternative is to throw in some crazy ideas, or some combination of annoyances, etc, that are even harder to balance, because they are infinitely more complex, and harder to stabilize.

Sure it's tricking the mind where "anything but xp, anything~!" doesn't exactly have a difference in terms of penalty

The idea of "buy back" doesn't make it a any less harsh system, it simply offers a compromise between "casuals" or "squealers" vs "hardcore" etc.

Like promising a candy to a kid after a needle shot, because...he's a kid. The candy is hardly worth the price of a needle shot.

I would straight up favor XP loss, because I know it's a simple mind trick. But I also know the squirmish need to be fooled, so buyback isn't exactly a bad idea...the idea of XP debt for instance was the approach or armor loss, etc.

An alternative I have seen is called "state locking" Where death, put you into a "state where you can't advance". And it can't be rid of till you get X/Y amount of XP or some other non-constant situation.

Say a death would add 5 minutes to a "state locked" where you can't level up, or change equipment, or trade, etc. And can't be removed till physically go to a special area, and state in that area for xyz amount of time. The area being isolated can make it an even harsher penalty then simply XP loss, but it does trick the mind that you did not lose anything, when in reality, you lost a lot by doing things you didn't want to do.

AKA: the old penalty box trick

[Argh]

In case of you missed what some people wrote in this thread, FFXI death wasn't only scary but it also made people not help each others because they knew/feared they would lose EXP during a BCNM/Mission/<random> quest and stuff.
The last thing a game should teach people is selfishness. Really.

you are twisting the truth. the penalty created the sense of danger. players act upon this variable. it is what drives the mentality and player base. ffxi's death penalty is true in that it actually offers sandbox elements to an mmo. no one is going to help you on a suicide mission without some form of compensation. gather the proper team and go at it. this is what linkshells are for.

this kiddie themepark mentality of the community is extremely discouraging. 90% of the lost subscriber base was expecting ffxi elements. i will just leave it at that....

[Kaedan]

Not really. "time" is situational. I loose nothing if I'm about to log off, or go have lunch or the millions of other things that time does not matter, in that it's a "free multi-task".

It's not a hard system to implement, it's just really stupid social one. That's why the XP loss system is so freakin easy to advise.

It's a simple mathematical formula to get balanced. If 20% is too harsh, you do 10% if 10% is too light, you do 15% etc, until it's acceptable.

Where the alternative is to throw in some crazy ideas, or some combination of annoyances, etc, that are even harder to balance, because they are infinitely more complex, and harder to stabilize.

Sure it's tricking the mind where "anything but xp, anything~!" doesn't exactly have a difference in terms of penalty

The idea of "buy back" doesn't make it a any less harsh system, it simply offers a compromise between "casuals" or "squealers" vs "hardcore" etc.

Like promising a candy to a kid after a needle shot, because...he's a kid. The candy is hardly worth the price of a needle shot.

I would straight up favor XP loss, because I know it's a simple mind trick. But I also know the squirmish need to be fooled, so buyback isn't exactly a bad idea...the idea of XP debt for instance was the approach or armor loss, etc.

Yeah, I was mostly being facetious. I still support my original idea. And yes, buyback is merely a compromise between hardcore and casual... which was my entire point. Casuals want no death penalty, hardcores want more severe penalties. I'm trying to find a middle ground.

[Fieros]

Casuals want no death penalty, hardcores want more severe penalties. I'm trying to find a middle ground.

SE need to sell Final Fantasy values to the casuals, instead of selling casual compromises to the FF crowd. The middle ground is where we currently reside, a bland experience truly satisfying to neither.

[Kaedan]

SE need to sell Final Fantasy values to the casuals, instead of selling casual compromises to the FF crowd. The middle ground is where we currently reside, a bland experience truly satisfying to neither.

I disagree. I believe the current system highly favors casuals and neglects moderate and hardcore players. Though I do agree that the current system is bland and unsatisfying. Which is why I suggested a system that is somewhat penalizing to please the hardcore crowd, and very forgiving to please the casuals.

SE wants both players...

So what are you defining as FF values?

[kukurumei]

I disagree. I believe the current system highly favors casuals and neglects moderate and hardcore players. Though I do agree that the current system is bland and unsatisfying. Which is why I suggested a system that is somewhat penalizing to please the hardcore crowd, and very forgiving to please the casuals.

SE wants both players...

So what are you defining as FF values?

Hard to define FF values, when FF values itself have been shot for the last decade.

But assuming it's FFXI values, in this case, it would be partying, adventuring, and basically the model Everquest became popular with.

Everything was about "building" a life inside the fictitious world. From the boring to the exciting, from the tough to the heartwarming.

The casual values would be something more like the FtP games or the DCUO things, where content becomes the name of the game. Log in, log out, log in, log out.

Then there is the 3rd faction which is the PvP faction, or PVE, in which you have a fight for survival. Basically "western" formula of MMOs, or what was branched off from the lineage families.

So basically to give names to each faction, you have
The everquest branch (FF style like)
The lineage branch (WoW, warhammer, etc)
The Guild wars branch (Casuals here) Though I would actually call it the Maple story branch, since that's the MMO that started this "give people anything they want as long as they pay ideal".

[PandaTaru]

you are twisting the truth. the penalty created the sense of danger. players act upon this variable. it is what drives the mentality and player base. ffxi's death penalty is true in that it actually offers sandbox elements to an mmo. no one is going to help you on a suicide mission without some form of compensation. gather the proper team and go at it. this is what linkshells are for.

this kiddie themepark mentality of the community is extremely discouraging. 90% of the lost subscriber base was expecting ffxi elements. i will just leave it at that....

How am I twisting the trust when it's exactly what happened in XI? and what kind of sandbox element XI death penalty did give? Show that death penalty can lead people to being selfish?

Don't start me with %... You're referring to that 90% of the people that left XIV left because of what? EXP lose? sense of danger? They didn't leave because they missed an half-assed time sink but because the game had no improvement between the beta and the final; slow and buggy UI, weird SP system, weird battle system, boring content, leve chores, and more. Who's twisting what already?

That kiddie theme-park community you despise is worth a lot more than the one you hang with.

edit/add:
And adding SP lose wouldn't solve anything at all. Hardcore would still not play the game because it would still suck for whatever reason, and causal would leave it because they don't want to lose time with stupid time sinks.

[Kaedan]

Hard to define FF values, when FF values itself have been shot for the last decade.

But assuming it's FFXI values, in this case, it would be partying, adventuring, and basically the model Everquest became popular with.

Everything was about "building" a life inside the fictitious world. From the boring to the exciting, from the tough to the heartwarming.

The casual values would be something more like the FtP games or the DCUO things, where content becomes the name of the game. Log in, log out, log in, log out.

Then there is the 3rd faction which is the PvP faction, or PVE, in which you have a fight for survival. Basically "western" formula of MMOs, or what was branched off from the lineage families.

So basically to give names to each faction, you have
The everquest branch (FF style like)
The lineage branch (WoW, warhammer, etc)
The Guild wars branch (Casuals here) Though I would actually call it the Maple story branch, since that's the MMO that started this "give people anything they want as long as they pay ideal".

I would mostly agree to that. But I was more curious what Fieros' values were, as he made the claim that SE had to "sell FF values to casuals". And I think that's exactly what I'm trying to accomplish by using a more traditional system (XP penalty), but making it more lenient (compromise for Casuals).